Post Your Comment

41 Comments

Actually, I was surprised to see they did as well as they even did. Hasn't ECS always been sort of a no-name class board? I've seen them a lot over the years in OEM systems but I would never think to look for an ECS board if I were building a custom PC. Then again, with all the new gadgets I've had my hands on lately, maybe I'm just out of the PC-loop lolReply

When reviewing motherboards, the board itself should be compared among competing products which would mean using as much common hardware as possible to eliminate the differences introducted by parts that are not subject to review. In the case of the AMD platform in question, using similar equipment (processor, GPU, memory, storage, etc.) allows a reader to see where among other motherboards this particular product fits because it becomes the only variable between each review.

Numbers obtained from Intel parts wouldn't add any comparative value to the review since more than just the motherboard would become a factor in quantification of total system performance. In the case of this review, the deviation in system memory was disclaimed and could not be prevented because of problems with the BIOS failing to recognize DIMMs that were common to previous reviews. Ian pointed that variation out before, during, and after presenting benchmark results so readers would be aware something changed that impacted performance AND that the new variable was a necessity due to apparent manufacturer design flaws.

If you want to compare this board's results with Intel products (probably to make yourself feel better for having blind brand loyalty if you're not simply attempting to troll), then you can check out the results in the benchmark database. Just click the "BENCH" link at the top of the page for instant brand-loyalist gratification.Reply

Seems legit to me. Was this article a comparison of Intel and AMD platforms? Didn't seem to be... looked like an ECS FM2 motherboard review and comparison to other FM2 offerings. You know, competitive products, ones that use the same technologies?

I had an ECS board with my P4 3.0C and it was a solid, stable board.These days though, I can't say I'd go for an ECS when there's Asus, ASRock, and Gigabyte which have all been trouble-free for me and typically are all feature-rich.Reply

I had that same board! :D I was dirt cheap compared to other boards of the same speed. For me, it also always worked well, OC'ing my Athlon, supporting all the RAM I inserted. But I also read of a load of people who had issues with the board.

I had one too! No issues at all (although the onboard sound was beyond awful), and I remember around that time how popular this board was. A friend of mine had some sort of cold-boot issue with the board, but if you think back to that time, almost every motherboard had some sort of quirk to it. Amazing how far we've come since those days...my last 5-6 motherboards have had exactly zero issues.

I really wouldnt hesitate to buy another ECS for any build, unfortunately I've gotten into the habit of buying most of my parts from the local Microcenter (instant gratification!) and they dont carry any ECS stuff.Reply

ECS has long been like most other board manufacturers. They have high and low end board but have not competed as strongly at the high end. It's good to see them moving more into this segment. However, I feel that it's a necessary move as well if they would like to stay in business because over the last five years or so motherboards have started using better quality components.Reply

On an open test bed I never get the feeling I'm going to break anything, as long as I have one finger holding the edge of the board. But this size PCB is working its way into quite a few sub-$200 motherboards.Reply

While I have purchased an ECS board in the past, I've always felt there is something inherently wrong with having to Google BIOS options just to see what they are. No help in the BIOS and the manual is the same. It just says the name of the option in the description.Reply

Still don't quite understand though, why benchmark various premium FM2 motherboards for a low to mid-range CPU? Surely most people will use AMD's Trinity with mATX and itx boards, particularly as it's perfect for a HTPC?

I'm still awaiting FM2 mATX benchmarks, sadly haven't seen any anywhere - unless anyone else has and can point me to the right place?Reply

Me too. I don't quite understand the point in using Trinity with FullATX.Trinity should meant to be used for budget gaming system which doesn't had much components. It should also used with HTPC where the size is limited.

I'm not sure why mITX is not as quite popular as it should be. The advantages of small form factor benefits over board features which is more than enough even for mITX ones.Reply

This has got to be the most poorly penned review I've read in a while. I reads mostly like a cut and paste jumble. You repeat yourself constantly. The grammar makes my brain hurt. Your assumptions about what "golden" represents is just space filler. For a moment I thought I was reading a bad auto-translate. Lastly, admitting you look around the web at other opinions and I now am not sure if this review is your opinion or some kind of reference to what other people have said. Please do over. D-. Reply

I do admit that sometimes my British idiosyncrasies come through more on some reviews than others, but it's not something I should apologize for. It did get a thorough triple check before going live, as do all my reviews. If there is something that completely boggles the mind, please feel free to email me for clarification.

Regarding space filler, my review is meant to cater for a large percentage of the potential readership, and thus explaining design philosophy to those not accustomed to it is part of the package.

As for looking at other reviews and such, I would be a poor academic researcher if I did not find reference and justification for the results and final opinions of the board. To go in blind would be completely remiss, especially if I come across a fringe issue, or fail to come across a significant issue because I do not specifically test for it. I am a strong advocate in researching a topic before discussing it, especially in such a public facing publication such as AnandTech.

This is actually one of the sharpest boards I have ever seen. As for the gold coated rear ports, I'm not sure if those are necessary, but if the price is right I wouldn't be complaining. Very ooglable! :)Reply

Back in the Athlon days, main board makers were using this trick to gain a few points in benchmarks, but thankfully it gradually disappeared again.Now many different main boards hit the market, that overclock CPUs out of the box. This is not acceptable in my book, as I want all components in my system to play fair with one another, and adhere to the well known specs.

This kind of fudging around for a few percent of performance in some computation benchmarks, that don't even reflect real world gains, should be harshly judged.

After reading this, I stopped reading the rest of the review.

One other note. As you write scientific articles, why do you not preface your articles with an abstract? I think this would increase reading efficiency. If the main strong and weak points, as well as the verdict can be resumed on the front page, then a lot of time reading non-essential information can be used otherwise.Reply

Sorry, after my past experiences, no matter how nice you find this board and no matter how inexpensive it is, I am not ever going to buy ECS hardware. I had a motherboard that was bad out of the box, returned it for warranty replacement, got 3 used ones in a row, including one with the socket lever broken, that were also non-functional over the course of 3 months, and then declared the board was no longer under warranty because it was beyond 90 days. (This was way back in the socket 5 days.) I swore off them then and have never bought another one, in nearly 20 years.